Gavin Cans Film Commission Head Stephanie Coyote
Evan Low to Become Country's Youngest Gay Asian-American Mayor
San Francisco Society Tips: How to End a Party
NY Times Singles Out Vallejo As Battleground Between Gays & Christians
Redheads Unite!
In an effort to drive people away from the Presidio, rendering it completely inaccessible to anything that resembles interesting, the Presidio Trust nixed plans last month for Foggy Bridge Winery. Because neighbors complained that the winery might prove too popular. No, we're not kidding. “When it came right down to it, there were just too many concerns about traffic and parking with that location in Crissy Field,” Joyce Stavert, general manager of the winery project, told the Press Democrat. Yesterday, however, ideas emerged about what the misguided trust would prefer to see pop up at the Crissy Field spot instead of the "8,000-case working winery" inside the former airplane hangar near Golden Gate Bridge. "[S]omething with more of an educational component, like a flight museum," Stavert revealed. (See, Crissy Field used to be a landing strip, so putting up an entire museum denoting that old-timey factoid of little to no interest would be a surefire bet. Also, for reals, that is an awful idea.) [via Eater]
Presidio Winery Nixed, Probably for Something You Will Never Want to Visit
add to stumble upon
add to reddit
tweet this
post to facebookComments (13) [rss]
Post a comment (Comment Policy)
Tips
Contribute
Latest Tip:
Looks like those OaklandIST restaurant or whatever people are butthurt about not being blogged about
[more]
Might as well leave it sitting empty and save a few million in renovations.
don't drink and rollerblade
I have an idea. How about these "neighbors" put their money where their mouth is and pony up the money needed for the presidio to be self sufficient? Like say, an extra monthly tax on their property.
It would seem fair to me that these people should pay the price if they want the presidio to continue to be their exclusive domain, free of difficult parking and riff raff.
Why bother honestly, if you ask a neighbor in SF - anywhere - if something bothers them - it will bother them. We are a city of self entitled complainers.
I walked by there a few months ago and overheard this guy telling his friends "Oh god, a winery? We don't need more yuppies here". He said as he got in his bmw.
And there you have nouveaux San Francisco in a nutshell.
But no, that's an excellent idea! The whole point is to have nobody go there, since being successful would lead to "concerns about traffic and parking." So you just MUST put something there of no interest except a few old fogeys. This is absolutely brilliant.
It's a national park not a shopping mall, its success is not measures by the number of cars that go there.
Or, whatever, maybe your idea is better:
http://tinyurl.com/ku2rge
A national park which if not self sufficient by a certain date, reverts back to control of the federal government for use as they see fit.
This is kink.com on a grand scale.
But please, continue to stymie any and all responsible development because it hurts your sense of wilderness in the city.
What neighbors? The people waaaaaay over-paying for the old base apartments? Seriously, all ten of them?
My god, people, it's an 8,000 case winery, which means they'd have a small tasting room that couldn't hold more than maybe ten people at a time.
Besides, have you been to that parking lot lately? It's not like it can get any worse.
Ah yes, because if there's one thing this city is bereft of, it's a place where you can buy wine.
That's what I was wondering too. What would be so great about a winery? A winery & an air museum hold about the same leave of interest to me.
The point is not that we need a winery, it's that someone wants to pay to put one there and they believe there is a market for it. No one is ponying up the money for an air museum.
How about a magic unicorn rainbow pot of gold factory?
I mean, I like the idea, so its totally realistic right?
Lets do it!